Check alternative sources - and tick variants

[Pam Downes]

On a whim I decided to trace my granddad's sister-in-law.
I have her marriage, found her on the 1881, 1891, and 1901 census. Got a choice of two birth certificates I can send for, but as she's with her grandparents in 1881 and 1891, I think her mother at least is doomed to remain shrouded in mystery.
Tracing her grandparents back, it looks as if Jane's father was illegitimate. I have a George who has to be him on the 1851, 1861, and almost certainly on the 1871 census. Got several marriages to choose from, but as I can't seem to find George on the 1881 or 1891 census, again that's a no-go area.
One thing I always forget is you can often access an alternative source of information. e.g. I have an sub to the dreaded A......y, but I can also access the 1901 census index via the 1901 census site. I also have a sub to Findmypast, which also has the 1891 census online. Searching for George Barker born 1849 +/- 2 years Lincolnshire will only give me other George Barkers born in those years in other parts of the country on A.....y, but on FMP I can tick 'variant' boxes. I have thus been given Barber, Bark and Parker. Barber I was already aware of - and Baker though that doesn't figure in their listing - but I would never have thought of Parker. But one of those quite probable mistakes that can be made by an enumerator when transferring the names to the schedule, or by an indexer.
On previous occasions I have found BMDs indexed on 'local' indexes on the UKBMD site http://www.ukbmd.co.uk/ which do not appear on the GRO Index.
So always think if there is an alternative source you can use - even just for an index - and always tick the variant/Soundex box. :)
Pam

[susanwillis59]

would that go for place of birth as well do you think?

[busyglen]

That's a good reminder Pam. It's something I think of on occasions, but quite often forget `sound like'.

As you say, sometimes you don't get chance to search with a variant, it depends on the programme.

Glenys

[Colin Moretti]

The Variants option can be a little misleading, depending on the way it's determined. I've searched the IGI for the UK on a number of occasions for my MORETTI ancestors, one or two crop up, and of course, variant names are offered; I was never able to find a marriage in about 1830. After much searching of adjacent parish registers I found it - it took about 3 trips to LMA. I subsequently discovered that it had been on the IGI all the time but it had been spelt MORRETTI (ie 2 Rs instead of 1); as far as the IGI search engine is concerned MORETTI and MORRETTI are NOT variants of the same name! |banghead|

Moral - even if the search engine offers variants try one or two of your own anyway.

Colin

[MythicalMarian]

One of the reasons I am quite fond of FMP is precisely because it lets you tick the variants box. It will also allow you to search on just a forename and age in a particular county, so that if you know your ancestor was definitely around in that town at that time, you can often find him by just typing in 'Absalom' (with variants), an age with a +/- 2 year variant and the county of Lancashire. OK, so it's a bit of job to view every 'Absalom' that comes up, but if you have a half-yearly subscription it's no problem. And usually, you will see a place of residence that narrows the field for you anyway.

Another reason I like FMP is that if you know your ancestors should have been at a certain address for - say - the 1861 census, you can actually search that whole street/road/even hamlet in some cases, viewing each transcript until your people hit you in the eye - usually with a misspelled surname. Viewing the household transcript with a 'wrong' surname but all the correct children's forenames and ages and places of birth, usually proves you have the right people.

I have found many of my elusive ones this way - and under some hilarious spellings too.

By using the main sites that offer census returns you should be able to nail most people - although it could be an expensive business. I have to say, though, that for the 1841, 1861, 1871, 1881 and 1891, I have found more of my families through FMP than any other site. I am only grateful that they are adding the 1851 and 1901 later this year, because I really do think I will renew my subscription with them.

[suedent]

The Variants option can be a little misleading, depending on the way it's determined. I've searched the IGI for the UK on a number of occasions for my MORETTI ancestors, one or two crop up, and of course, variant names are offered; I was never able to find a marriage in about 1830. After much searching of adjacent parish registers I found it - it took about 3 trips to LMA. I subsequently discovered that it had been on the IGI all the time but it had been spelt MORRETTI (ie 2 Rs instead of 1); as far as the IGI search engine is concerned MORETTI and MORRETTI are NOT variants of the same name! |banghead|

Moral - even if the search engine offers variants try one or two of your own anyway.

Colin

I have the same problem with Quaintrill, Quaintrell, Quantrill, Quantrell

According to the IGI they aren't all variants of the same name - oh yes they are!